Greymatter's ue Diary

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Arghhhhh shit. This confirms in 1985 Access were using % min repayment so it looks like our argument may be dead now. Shit

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Don't ask how I acquired the above images


(gooooooogle)

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

the 23rd was a Wednesday - as Paul says lets presume that it didn't even get to print till the Friday - posted Monday (28th) plus 2 days postage takes you to the 30th (8 days). You then get 6 days taking you to the 5th. So technically you'd have time to remedy BUT that depends on when it was actually posted. This could be a good few days and not the estimate I gave. Paul knows the exact days so see if he can clarify.

The original 14 days offered gave from 23rd to 6th (14 days).


See what Paul says. No doubt he'll be around later

Hi Paul
is their any mileage with the DN?
I really hope so.
Thanks
GM

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Hi Niddy
Just reading back through some Natwest and Midland Acces stuff pre 1980 and post.I noticed that they refer to 'Conditions of Use' this must be because CCA was not used at the time.So would it not be considered that these 'Conditions of Use' were the pre cursor for the CCA issue.Therefore would it not be useful to at least compare these 'Conditions of use' pre 1980 to that of the 'current CCA' that Natwest issue.As it appears that these 'conditions' were what Access used to inform the cardholder what he can and cannot do.These conditions are quite different to the latest NW CCA.
What do you think,possibility or not for going for 'Variation'? which must prove that something was issued back in 1980.
GM

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

The Initial use of a card was then stated you agree to the T&Cs appertaining to that card, a fuss was raised by papers etc to that launch and a so called Lawyer stated that it was o.k. = the 1st use of the card was the agreement, News of the World if I remember correctly did an article on it at the time as others did.

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Thanks ,The Tech Clerk
So I need sight of these TC's and surely NW must let me have a copy of these ,otherwise how can I compare then and now as undoubtedly there have been Variations .So the TC's appertaining to the card could possibly be the same as the 'conditions of Use' issued at that time.
GM

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Conditions of use, if I remember correctly was the term in use at the time, we have been thru this one before on here not long ago, Niddy may be able to enlighten you on the actual thread?

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Yes you are right
4th Dec 2012 post#190 the terms were too generic. Oldaccess posts.I supplied the copies.
Thanks TTC

[garlok]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Ahhh here you go. I thought the CGC was separate

1991 card

[ATTACH=CONFIG]9870[/ATTACH]

Thanks for all this mate. However in the 80's I know when we had Midland Accounts and Access cards the cheque guarantee card I had saw the "Access" symbol bottom right corner roughly where you show the hologram. Am away for a week tomorrow but we have to conduct a search for some other stuff so it will be a session in the loft. A search through the files we have to hand last night didn't turn anything up. I know we have some Access material somewhere because it came up in 2009 when the sols asked for the earliest info we had on the BC stuff.

regards
G

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Thanks Garlok
GM

[garlok]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

No problems GM. I'll do what I can. I do know that there are some old (very) statements and bits of correspondence in one of the files. It is pertinent in some ways to one of our own issues. I find it very hard to grasp that it took 11 years to get the Act into place and fully operative from the day it went onto the Statute Book.

regards
G

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Many thanks Garlok,appreciated.
GM

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Hi Niddy
I have sent you a PM
GM

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

[QUOTE]
Arrow (was EGG)
Type of account (Loan with PPI)
Date commenced (Approx 1999)
Approx Balance (£3000)
Last made a FULL payment (Apl 2003)
Paying by arrangement with DCA(Moorcroft)
Default Notice issued by Egg(May 2003)
Account run by ARC
Been paying token payment for a few years.
25th June 2011 Egg assigned the account to Arrow Global
30/01/2012 CCA requested by recorded delivery
10/02/2012 Received letter from DCA
responded with Final Response - UE (No CCA Received)
27/02/2012 Received response from Moorcroft' They advise me that they no longer deal with this account.For avoidance of doubt I should resubmit my request to theclient.Arrow Global(Britannica Recoveries)=ARC Europe
27/11/2012
Hi Niddy
I have received a copy of my agreement and terms and conditions,these I have EM'd to you for your opinion and course of action.
1/12/2012 Niddy:Hi
Regards s.18 - I don't know if it will be as simple as that, Paul was teaching me this but it's rather complex and to be honest I am rather busy to learn it anyway.... but it's not as simple as we used to think, ie separate PPI to loan terms - that apparently does not affect s.18.
For now don't worry about this too much. I don't think s.18 will apply here.
1/12/2012: I know you never got separate terms for PPI, nobody did
The terms are a recon of the current terms, problem though - there is nothing there about default rates, defaulting you, sharing info - nothing.
Hence, they are not the original terms. This is UE
Chill
However there was only one set of tcs and that is all.
Niddy : Doesn't matter mate, the ones they sent are UE hence respond as follows ---> Our Templates | Unenforceability Templates | CCA Query - Missing Prescribed Terms
04/12/2012:Rec del ‘Missing PTs’ sent
19/04/2013:Letter from ARC EUROPE basically telling me that the docs they provided are valid and comply with CCA.They have viewed my signed agreement to the Terms and Conditions.
Goes on to : I should make arrangements to pay by affordable instalments with an IE sheet.
They wish to make it quite clear that unless a payment is made within 30 days along with a firm offer to clear the balance they will obtain clients instructions on what further action they want ARC to take.
What response should I send to this letter please?
19/04/2013:Niddy:I'd just wait and see what they send next and we'll take it from there.....

23/05/2013
letter from ARC Europe informing me that as I have not had any response from me ‘Please do not ignore the contents of this letter or the time limits we have referred to’
Niddy,what would be my response to this please?
07/08/2013 Letter from Arrow informing me that account has been transferred to:Wilkin Chapman LLp and in future to correspond with them.
07/08/2013:MrsD: just be careful here Greymatter, as soon as this mob make contact I'd get the sold in dispute off.[Quote]

UPDATE 15/08/2013
Letter received from Wilkin Chapman,please contact them to discuss,etc,etc. and contact them within 14 days.

As Mrs D suggested 'Sold in dispute 'going rec tomorrow.
GM

[greymatter]

Re: Greymatter's ue Diary

Hi Niddy
I have sent you a PM
GM

Hi Niddy
Did you get my PM?

Thanks
GM